Hello, I need yours help with configuring and routing for two internet providers.
Router “CAR 2216” has config with two ISPs:
(*) Ignoring any higher level considerations, read this:
https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/spaces/ROS/pages/152600617/Per+connection+classifier
There is no (*) way to add two different ISPs to increase speed. At most you go as fast as the faster of the two.
Rextended provided one of the methods in 2. above. PCC
If you want a simpler way then ECMP, equal distance is far easier and gets you roughly equal useage of both wans.
Lastly you will need to use policy routing and either
a. mangle which is more complex
OR
b. use routing rules which is simpler
Depending upon your TOTAL requirements not a few snippets of text.
You need a complete pLAN
Knowing all the facts, an efficient config can start to be developed
Thanks for the link, I'll go read it.
My idea is to split the traffic, not to increase the speed.
When we talk about the Internet, such as surfing and etc., I want users to use the secondary provider, and when we talk about the rest of the connectivity, the primary provider should be used.
Cannot help with vague ideas, nor can you help yourself by stumbling around. Get serious, create a plan, make yourself a diagram provide the information outlined to guide you, attempt the config
and then post back when you have questions or need the config looked at due to issues.
/export file=anynameyouwish ( minus router serial number, any public WANIP information, vpn keys )
Thanks for the quick replies, with your help I’m moving in the right direction.
@nonpe; you can try this setup to route subnet 192.168.88.1/24 through ISP2 while keeping ISP1 as the default gateway for everything else. This assumes you’ve already created the routing table ISP2.
Mark traffic from the subnet to use ISP2
/routing rule add src-address=192.168.88.1/24 action=lookup table=ISP2
Make sure ISP2 use its own routing table for default gw
/ip route add dst-address=0.0.0.0/0 gateway=“your-ISP2-gw” distance=2 routing-table=ISP2
Set up WAN src-nat for ISP2
/ip firewall nat add chain=srcnat src-address=192.168.88.1/24 out-interface=ISP2 action=masquerade
Sigh… and what if he has port forwarding, and VPNS, and other traffic from subnet to another subnet…
The point is, throwing shit to see what sticks is the wrong approach for advice.
Find out the facts, and then provide accurate advice.
Lord knows Ive tried to capture that critter with my butterfly net but he keeps escaping.
No need to speculate. This is a standard setup to get split outbound traffic working, just like he asked. If there’s anything else, I’m pretty sure @nonpe can speak for himself.
Your application to work at border security is denied. 
What borders? Wait a few months and… there will be “some” unemployed on border customs in Canamericaland… 
You must mean when Maine joins Canada!
Since St Pierre @ Miquelon is right next to us, I would rather be a Province of France ( and believe me I have to eat a lot of crow to say that ) than a State run by the orange drag queen.
As a matter of fact, if this whole farce means we end up being part of the Schengen zone it will all be worth it. I can retire in Tuscanny and throw dead fish at my neighbour ;-!!
Dont worry when my MT dies, probably due to my configging skills or the power company fails ( how often unknown ) then we can communicate using the Italian work-around tomato cans…
…
Let’s get out of the rambling.
Given that security is important,
for me you have a too serious approach.
You approach a network for casual users in transit at the bar in the same way as
a network of institutes for bacteriological research.
I know that total security is equal to the sum of its parts, and other similar speeches,
but I assure you that the default firewall is enough in 9x% of cases…
There’s no point in complicating things for basic users.
Instead of approaching with confidence you scare them and then they throw away the configurations…
I disagree but thats a healthy thing. Otherwise we might as well all be clones!
The difference is a simple explanation, and the light bulb comes on and the new OP sees the logic, understands the much simpler new rules and how the old rule worked and gains confidence and knowledge and looks ahead to further adventures with MT RoS.
Its all about perspective.
Hello everyone,
Hello everyone,
in the end I chose a configuration with VRF, so each provider has a distance of 1 in a separate virtual table and everything works perfectly.
I look forward to your comments for and against my approach.
I chose this configuration after one of the very valuable videos of “The Network Berg” on YouTube.
I would comment if a config was provided
/export file=anynameyouwish (minus router serial number, any publicWANIP information, keys )
Off the top of my head there is no need for VRF, can you post link to berg video you used please.
This engineer has a lot of valuable advice, I personally am glad that there are people like him who help the community with clear and valuable advice and comparisons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3fmrDqrbDU&t=648s